Philosophy and death

On the other hand, before we are born, there is no one in our life that we love dearly; and no things that bring us boundless satisfaction and fulfillment. People and things that are obliterated along with “I” for all of eternity in a No God world where immortality and salvation are merely the embodiment of leaps of faith that some are able to make and others not.

Why on earth do you suppose we invent the Gods? Why on earth do you suppose that some are terrified of death, oblivion, nothingness?

And: How on earth is that not reasonable if you truly do love your life and must come face to face with the prospect of the obliterated “I”?

Again, if those like pood are able to think themselves into approaching their own existential demise in a comforting psychologism like his above, more power to them. It sure beats my own frame of mind.

But then, here and now, how close is he to his own actual flesh and blood death?

Rather than a…philosophical death?

You know, if you can fit all of this on the headstone.

Beats me. See Twain.

Because when my “I” is obliterated I won’t know or care. Again, See Twain. No inconvenience,.

Pretty close, I reckon.

As my friend in California and I used to say, “Life sucks, you eat a lot of Mexican food, and then you die.” The dying and the Mexican food are the good parts, provided the food is prepared in the authentic Mexican style.

I should amend to say, “the dying and Mexican food are the good parts, providing the food is prepared in the authentic Mexican style and the dying is quick and painless.”

Being afraid of dying seems quite reasonable to me, as it is often prolonged, painful and messy. Being afraid of death (non-being) does not seem reasonable to me. As the atheist Ayn Rand said when pressed on this point, “you won’t be there,” which is exactly right and even more succinct than Twain.

My point is to note how, for many/most, there is a rather substantial gap between contemplating “I” before they were born…the part where they have absolutely nothing to lose…being born, accumulating relationships that are near and dear to them, accumulating experiences that bring them enormous fulfillment and then being told by the doc that they have just days to live.

Sure, some are able to think themselves into comforting frames of mind that manage to subsume the loss of the life they love in something akin to what I construe to be a TwainSpeak psychologism.

And indeed if their life actually sucks, the pain and the suffering can reach the point where death itself is the comforting thought. That’s all rooted in dasein of course. Each of us on our own unique path. But as per usual pood seems more intent on confronting his own death smugly.

He’ll show death!

Now, perhaps he will offer up some details as to how close he did come to death.

Also, note that his own life does contain plenty of loving relationships and precious experiences that will tumble over into the abyss with him. Perhaps he can afford to be more “philosophical” about it because he really doesn’t have all that much to lose anyway.

You really just can’t have a normal conversation with anyone, can you? :laughing:

There you are again, twisting my words, and changing the meaning of a question you asked to which I replied, but now it’s a different question!

Whatever, dude!

I’ll go with Oscar Wilde, who reportedly on his deathbed said, “Either that wallpaper goes, or I do.”

They didn’t change the wallpaper, so he went! :mrgreen:

I’ll stick with this:

And yet, the energy of the mind-spirit-soul recalls. Recalls lights that are an appearent sign of some phenomenal certainty in the sense of Descartes, as he faced the uncertain in the conviction of the eternal extension , which before the earth was apprehended became a universally extended flat surfaced eternal infinity

That was before Einstein-Galileo earth became the globe, and people started to fear what happens when they reach the end.

The atomistic globists, out of fear, had to find out what happens when you reach the end and fall off , existentially fall off the precipice, so they tried jumping off things, airplanes, diving boards, to see what happens.

But just because extension encircled reality and wraps it’self into a little prebirth womanlike bubble, doesen’t mean anyone can simulate himself to appear to climb back into the womb.

Although they do in the act of intercourse climb back from out of it, and come, back out of it to think they will live again, but will they?

What about the ones who don’t have kids? Can they live again in the bubbly world?

Yes they can because each one of them, are into one another, their types are very similar to a degree.

Their genes are not so unique when differentiated from other species, and mixing genes among species are uncommon between men and animals.

So what of eternity?

Ecmondu is right in holding that trillions to the trillionth power, and that to the trillionth can produce intergalactic spires of spirited bodies, who are willing to sustain human existence regardless of how the look, think

They are sustained by vast buildup of energy, so powerful that it can bind extasis into the flashes of light of pickets or phenomenal reality that we jump into, on the way out, jump in, take a chance with a minute portion of energy, coming thru the tiny vibrating slit that determines which slit most accords and determines the next phase of fate of even the least desirable

This is what happened to the one tiny point vanished into a virtuality, that the civic black hole emphatically transformed into just one metaphor into myraid, and light up the sky in a blazing explosion of images, some with a big bang.

If this was mot the case, evolution of species could not take place, and thenidentity we harbor could never be comprehensibly be integrated in the first place before the word was given

PS this is trying to be some kind of 3 am allegory to sooth . other than that it is a fictional account to the question : is life but a dream.

" boat, beneath a sunny sky
Lingering onward dreamily
In an evening of July

Children three that nestle near,
Eager eye and willing ear,
Pleased a simple tale to hear

Long has paled that sunny sky;
Echoes fade and memories die;
Autumn frosts have slain July.

Still she haunts me, phantomwise,
Alice moving under skies
Never seen by waking eyes.

Children yet, the tale to hear,
Eager eye and willing ear,
Lovingly shall nestle near.

In a Wonderland they lie,
Dreaming as the days go by,
Dreaming as the summers die;

Ever drifting down the stream
Lingering in the golden gleam
Life, what is it but a dream? "

Lewis Carol

You know, if you can fit all of [b][u]this[/b][/u] on the headstone.

Death in Classical Daoist Thought
Bernard Down explains how two ancient Chinese philosophers explored new perspectives on matters of life and death.

A mystic explanation indeed. And, really, think about sustaining a frame of mind like this from day to day to day in your own life. Instead, it only seems feasible to me if you abandon altogether the life that the overwhelming preponderance of us live and isolate yourself in a community of like-minded Daoists. You come up with a way to pay the bills for all of the things you need to actually subsist from day to day to day and then concentrate solely on all the spiritual stuff.

Yes, for a tiny fraction of us that’s an option. But how on earth is all this mystical thinking relevant to the lives that the vast majority of us live? With jobs and families and obligations to any number of others? And that’s just in regard to living itself. Dying? Again, if you are able to convince yourself that the mystical thinking of the Dao here is the real deal, great, end of story. And that’s the beauty of being on a spiritual path. If you believe something that makes it true. Just stay away from sites like this where you are likely to find those who challenge what you believe. Who ask for more substantial evidence in order that you demonstrate that what you believe about living and dying is a reasonable assessment.

I’m sorry but before flesh and blood human beings contemplate how they ought to live as part of Nature they need to confront the fact that in order to subsist in Nature they need to come up social, political and economic rules of behavior that will necessitate them interacting with others in families, in relationships, in communities…both on the job and off.

Countless responsibilities and obligations that over and again can confront them with conflicts in which spiritual bromides alone will never be enough to sustain the community.

Again, sure, unless you sever your ties with the realities the overwhelming preponderance of us deal with and nestle down comfortably in a religious community.

And how close or how far are the spiritual mantras going to be from abstractions? In regard to both life and death.

Death and the Human Animal
Mary Midgley questions the superficial allure of endless life.

The first thing that always pops into my head when encountering a “philosophical” assessment of death like this one is: did he believe in God? Did he believe in life after death?

You tell me: indiatoday.in/technology/fe … 2018-11-24

Then the part where the question of death revolves around someone like Jobs. In other words, someone who lived what can only be described as an extraordinary life bursting at the seams with all manner of accomplishments. In other words, much more than many… he had that much more to lose.

The celebrity syndrome let’s call it. Lives that are awash in experiences that most of us can only dream of. But: the more you live this life the more unbearable the reality of death can become. I always come back here to Steve McQueen.

“In 1979, shortly after filming The Hunter, McQueen was diagnosed as having mesothelioma, a rare form of lung cancer often caused by exposure to asbestos. Told the condition was inoperable, he secretly checked in to a controversial Mexican clinic run by a self-promoting Texas dentist with no medical degree. There he underwent an arduous, three-month regimen involving coffee enemas, animal-cell injections, laetrile (a substance derived from apricot pits), and more than 100 vitamin and mineral pills a day — as well as a born-again experience. But his health only deteriorated, and on Nov. 7, 1980, Steve McQueen died from a heart attack following surgery to remove a tumor — a fighter and renegade to the bitter end.”

Next up: your death.

Too bad for us though, right? This all may well happen sooner than most people think, but how many here think it will happen in their own lifetime? So, before we take death into the philosophical realm of “would you want to life forever”?, there’s still that pesky problem of “can you live forever?”

And of course the part where the older you get the more the body can make you wish you were dead anyway. No, we need a science able to allow us to pick the age we no longer want to stop aging…with a body that toes the line with respect to all of the ghastly afflictions it can pummel us with. Also, the part where others are not able to go about the task of ending out life themselves.

Bottom line: Not just the best of all possible worlds deathwise but the one perfect world both lifewise and deathwise.

Well, they don’t call it science fiction for nothing.

I hate to be the bearer of bad need, but you don’t really think that science was an invention?
The scientific method arose from a substance -sub stance which was part of the analysand.

That substance is hotly debated within scientific circles as we speak

We’ll need a context of course.

I know! How about your death. Your very own existential death in regard to the inventions of science and the inventions of philosophy and the inventions of theology.

As for mine, none of these inventions seem able to dissuade me from confronting the seeming fact that soon enough “I” will topple over into the abyss that is oblivion.

As will you?

Now, in some ways that can actually be a good thing if the life you are living now is awash in pain and suffering.

It’s all rather existential. Rooted in, let’s call it, dasein.

Let’s discuss.

Note to Alan:

Stay out of this!!!

Sorry to have to defer this, I am boarding a plane to Las Vegas , will answer tonight.

Sorry to have to defer this, I am boarding a plane to Las Vegas , will answer tonight.

Sorry to tale so much time.

The proof is sort of in the pudding, metaphysically because one can argue that the sub stance or the axiomatic consistamce of natural science evolved consistently, in corresponding , methodical function.

How so? The analysand of the substance developed the brain’s functional latency with conjunction of the ability to analyze that, of which it was constituted.

The philosophy of mind shows that the brain develops so as to enhance it’s functional utility to break down the substantial, physical constituant of which it consists and apprehend that analysand, which changes substantially the analysand, or material that becomes the object of analysis

The analysand or, the substance analized would become anathema. or even un-seen, ununderstoid, and left unanalyzed without the cognative evolution which is essential and substantially reductive a-posteriori. that series of trial and error tests that build up certainti from a-priori ‘inventions’ literally- as Peace girl caulks them

The substance literally appears in a different substantial mode in closer examination, and actually, the modus operans results in the test that analyzes the kind of substance as both prior, and suceedomg to various held and verefued reductions to certain levels of apprehension congruent with cognitive development.

The end result of cognitive development is able to assess the comstituciam of the substance as that of an energy field, inclouding it’self : the matter if which the brain composed.

That is basically the metaphysical proof of correspondence with those of the physical, and that s is why the proof is in the pudding

Death is only a change in preception of levels of that change , on a continuous flow of perceiving a differentially relating functional appearance if utilizyng themselves within changing contextual appearances.

It can never end, because there is mo death as how we under-stand it conventionally.

We do pass conventionally but who we are will always become, a consustance of energy fields which can, or can nit dissipate and change .

The fear if otherness. of fearing that we are part of that otherness, is fearful and can lead to agression. which is a denial of that othernesd and a projection toward fearing that projection from others.

I personally have not arrived to bu able to eliminate all doubtful fear , but at least i am beginning to understand the validity of it, without actually perceiving that.
I must actually see it to believe it.

Sorry to tale so much time.

The proof is sort of in the pudding, metaphysically because one can argue that the sub stance or the axiomatic consistamce of natural science evolved consistently, in corresponding , methodical function.

How so? The analysand of the substance developed the brain’s functional latency with conjunction of the ability to analyze that, of which it was constituted.

The philosophy of mind shows that the brain develops so as to enhance it’s functional utility to break down the substantial, physical constituant of which it consists and apprehend that analysand, which changes substantially the analysand, or material that becomes the object of analysis

The analysand or, the substance analized would become anathema. or even un-seen, ununderstoid, and left unanalyzed without the cognative evolution which is essential and substantially reductive a-posteriori. that series of trial and error tests that build up certainti from a-priori ‘inventions’ literally- as Peace girl caulks them

The substance literally appears in a different substantial mode in closer examination, and actually, the modus operans results in the test that analyzes the kind of substance as both prior, and suceedomg to various held and verefued reductions to certain levels of apprehension congruent with cognitive development.

The end result of cognitive development is able to assess the comstituciam of the substance as that of an energy field, inclouding it’self : the matter if which the brain composed.

That is basically the metaphysical proof of correspondence with those of the physical, and that s is why the proof is in the pudding

Death is only a change in preception of levels of that change , on a continuous flow of perceiving a differentially relating functional appearance if utilizyng themselves within changing contextual appearances.

It can never end, because there is mo death as how we under-stand it conventionally.

We do pass conventionally but who we are will always become, a consustance of energy fields which can, or can nit dissipate and change .

The fear if otherness. of fearing that we are part of that otherness, is fearful and can lead to agression. which is a denial of that othernesd and a projection toward fearing that projection from others.

I personally have not arrived to bu able to eliminate all doubtful fear , but at least i am beginning to understand the validity of it, without actually perceiving that.
I must actually see it to believe it.

sorry fir the duplicate

Note to Alan:

Funny. Really funny. :exclamation: :exclamation: :exclamation:

I’m glad it gave You some reprieve !